The importance of thought experiments
Автор: Dragana Ćorić
Журнал: Pravo - teorija i praksa @pravni-fakultet
Рубрика: Original scientific work
Статья в выпуске: 2 vol.38, 2021 года.
Бесплатный доступ
Living in the world of legal norms seems to be easy: you have rules of conduct guiding you how to behave in a lot of life situations including the fact what will happen to you if you do not obey these rules. In a way, legal norms are predicting the future giving us the guidelines for living. Although the legal system together with its rules tend to cover all areas of social life, there are situations that couldn’t be foreseen at the time of making a particular regulation. These gaps could be spanned by adopting subsequent rules of conduct. In order to predict an event that may occur, and to predict human behavior in these situations as well as a human response to punishment when someone violates a rule, it is good to conduct- a thought experiment. The basis of a thought experiment can be a completely fictitious and even currently impossible event, or a variation of some of the known and possible events. The key question when formulating a thought experiment is “what if”. The answers to this question may start with “then it is possible”, “then it will be”, “it could be” or something similar. The answers will differ in terms of content only on the basis of the values, beliefs and attitudes of the one who answers the “what if” question. In our paper, we will briefly present the concept of a thought experiment, its internal structure, types and, by giving some examples, encourage readers to be more informed about this topic.
Thought experiment, imagination
Короткий адрес: https://sciup.org/170202229
IDR: 170202229 | DOI: 10.5937/ptp2102031C
Список литературы The importance of thought experiments
- Brown, J. R. & Fehige, Y. (2019). Thought Experiments. In: Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Downloaded 2020, March 15 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/thought-experiment/
- Chalmers, D. J. (1996). The Conscious Mind: In Search of a Fundamental Theory, New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press
- Cole, D. (2020). The Chinese Room Argument. In: Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Downloaded 2020, March 15 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2020/entries/chinese-room/
- Einhorn, H. J. & Hogarth, R. M. (1982). Prediction, Diagnosis, and Causal Thinking in Forecasting, Journal of Forecasting, 1(1), pp. 23–36
- Fuller, Lon L. (1949). The Case of the Speluncean Explorers, Harvard Law Review, 62 (4), Downloaded: 2020, April 15 from http://w.astro.berkeley.edu/~kalas/ethics/documents/introduction/fuller49.pdf
- Gedankenexperiment, Merriem-Webster’s Dictionary, Downloaded 2020, March 15 from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gedankenexperiment
- Goodman, N. (1947). The Problem of Counterfactual Conditionals, The Journal of Philosophy, 44 (5), pp. 113–128
- Kirk, R. (2019). Zombies, In: Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Downloaded 2020, March 15 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2019/entries/zombies/
- Kuhn, S. (2019). Prisoner’s Dilemma, In: Edward N. Zalta (ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy, Downloaded 2020, March 15 from https://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2019/entries/prisoner-dilemma/
- Mach, E. (1960). The Science of Mechanics, 6th American ed. Translated by Thomas J. McCormack. La Salle: Open Court
- Meynell, L. (2014). Imagination and insight: a new acount of the content of thought experiments, Synthese, 191 (17), pp. 4149–4168
- Putnam, H. (1973). Meaning and Reference, Journal of Philosophy 70, pp. 699–711
- Putnam, H. (1985). The meaning of “meaning” (1975/1985). In: Philosophical Papers. Vol. 2: Mind, Language and Reality: Cambridge University Press
- Rescher, N. (1991). Thought Experiment in Pre-Socratic Philosophy. In: Horowitz, T., & Massey, G.J. (eds.), Thought Experiments in Science and Philosophy, (pp.31–41), Rowman& Littlefeld, (Savage)
- Routley, R. (1973-1993). Is There a Need For a New, an Environmental, Ethic?, Proceedings of the XVth World Congress of Philosophy, Varna, 1: 205–10,1973; reprinted in M. Zimmerman et al. (eds.), Environmental Philosophy: from Animal Rights to Radical Ecology, Englewood, NJ: Prentice Hall: 1993, p.12–21
- Sanna, L. J. (1998). Defensive Pessimism and Optimism: The Bitter-Sweet Influence of Mood on Performance and Prefactual and Counterfactual Thinking, Cognition and Emotion, 12 (5), pp. 635–665
- Sarewitz, D. & Pielke, R. (1999). Prediction in Science and Policy, Technology in Society, 21(2), pp. 121–133
- Searle, J. R. (1980). Minds, brains, and programs. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 3 (3), pp. 417–457
- Searle, J. R. (1999). The Chinese Room, In: Wilson R.A. and Keil F. (eds.), The MIT Encyclopedia of the Cognitive Sciences, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press
- Wittgenstein, L. (1997). Lecture on Ethics, reprinted in : Darwall, Gibbard, and Railton, (eds), Moral Discourse and Practice: Some Philosophical Approaches, New York: Oxford University Press
- Witt-Hansen, J. ( 1976). H.C. Ørsted, Immanuel Kant and the Thought Experiment, Danish Yearbook of Philosophy, 13, pp. 23–48
- Yeates, L. B. (2004). Thought Experimentation: A Cognitive Approach, Graduate Diploma in Arts (By Research): Dissertation, University of New South Wales, Downloaded 2020, April 15, from: https://ia803100.us.archive.org/4/items/TECA2004/TECA-%282004%29.pdf
